DonkeyCigars

It’s weird how my Baylor and Tech friends are mad at me, like I had a vote or made this happen.

I used the "I don't want to bring an umbrella to a brain storm, keep going..." line in a meeting at work and it went over like I was a hilarious genius. Thanks Ted Lasso!

beat me to it, i saw on google it was $.35

at $.35 per pound that's a whopping nearly $4!

Yea, probably not the place to get into this and probably no value in discussing it at all, but that's a too simplistic reduction and one that isn't considering the full point of view (or at least mine), and is only filtered through the prism of what you believe the subject to mean and be. Anyways, back to CRT news. I read an interesting piece on a latinx professor being denied tenure at Harvard that might be of interest to this topic. It's interesting how one of the last bastions of a conservative guard (centrist libs, or Harvard in this case) is to hold the line and take the position that activism is not scholarship: https://www.newyorker.com/news/annals-of-education/why-lorgia-garcia-pena-was-denied-tenure-at-harvard

I voted for Tump in 2020, but as I've said, I like Biden and feel like he was the optimal candidate for my tastes of all the candidates in the D primary. I am gracious and respectful of a Biden presidency generally and generally try to defend from various strawman insults. He's a good guy and I like him and think he doesn't want to upset the apple cart too much. But my personal political beliefs and voting record isn't really germane to this conversation, I don't feel like, because it is skewed. I am one of the more staunch "single item voter" and put a near universal weight on a certain subject that I personally and spiritually believe is the worst thing you can do. Worse than anything Trump or Biden or any American politician could even wish to do, unless they started genociding people.

No joking, that is sick and twisted to joke about something like that. I'll cop to ignorance, I guess. I'd heard the name and knew it was a hate crime but that's about the extent of it.

Once. Let the record reflect accuracy, whether good, bad or indifferent.

1000%. What you have said is the moser articulate synthesis of what it means to be politically conservative and “fundamentalist”. Which is why I think the most ignorant and, frankly, stupid criticism of conservative politics I hear on these boards is “they never want to do anything with govt when they have power! All they do is block stuff and never try to do anything new or politically innovative!11 but whhyyyy!!????” Conservative politics is about preserving what is left of the old guard and maintaining the status quo. Or, when you get a firebrand like Trump, not only stalling “progress” but actually trying to actively go backwards and ripping out “progress” and reinstalling old methods. Hence the “make America great again” sloganeering, which is essentially saying “take us back to the good days, not whatever this is presently.”

Yes, I think that is right. I think a lot of the analysis and insight we’ve talked about on this page, on the why and how as it relates to political efficiency, is not something a lot of folks are probably concerning themselves with and are aware or recognizing, because they are in the land of emotions and it’s easy to drive a horse when you have a bit in the mouth. And I personally think, as someone (and a lot of us as someones, plural) who is not middle class, I think we discount that a true middle class life is also one devoid of most privilege. There is a lot of anxiety and emotion and fear when becoming a “poor” for the middle class is only a month or two of being out of work and when the middle class knows they have to run out the clock because there might not be a strong, in-demand skillset for today’s workforce. Because of this I think it’s easy for a lot of folks to fight tooth and nail and never be rational about things in order to keep whatever little advantage or status they have. Anything to not get relegated down to the bottom tier of the American caste system, as it were.

I knew of them from "Good" which I loved as a teenager and that's it. One year, I think it was 09?, during Mardi Gras I ended up getting swept into a House of Blues where Better than Ezra was playing. Apparently Drew Brees and some Saints were there somewhere and the Lombardi Trophy made it's way to the stage. You think Mardi Gras is cool? Mardi Gras + Super bowl celebration of a Saints win that happened a week or so prior = Insanity. But I digress, probably. Listened to that song linked above and think it sucks.

Most anticipated book of 2021 for me is Afterparties: Stories by Anthony Veasna So. Super talented writer who died of a drug overdose, so this will be his only work, and the lead story was fantastic. Check it out: https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2020/02/10/three-women-of-chucks-donuts

This hits close to home because I was at a Mets game at Citi Field this week. As an aside, the new LGA terminals are pretty dope.

Tech billionaire Peter Thiel is injecting huge sums into some crucial 2022 midterm contests — and drawing fire from Republicans eager to tie their rivals to the GOP's Silicon Valley bogeymen. Why it matters: Whether he's backing a candidate or being attacked by one, Thiel embodies the present GOP zeitgeist. His brand of nationalist conservatism mimics the party's Trump-era shift. Yet the fortune he's using to bankroll like-minded candidates derives from an industry reviled by much of that base. This dichotomy has produced at least one notable example this year of a candidate publicly attacking Thiel just months after trying to arrange a sit-down with him. Thiel's $10 million infusion into a super PAC supporting the Ohio Senate bid by "Hillbilly Elegy" author J.D. Vance represented his first major foray into the 2022 cycle. It also opened up a line of attack. During an interview last week, one of Vance's primary rivals, former Ohio state treasurer Josh Mandel, hit Vance for positioning himself against Big Tech while he has "a guy who is on the board of Facebook as his biggest political funder." Mandel declined to name Thiel. He also didn't mention the multiple overtures he himself made to Thiel early in the campaign. Text messages reviewed by Axios show Mandel flagged his candidacy announcement for Thiel and followed up to request meetings with him in February and March. Thiel does not appear to have responded. Additional text messages show Mandel praising Thiel in 2018 over his portrayal in a New York Times profile. "I think by in [sic] large people here in the rust belt agree with you," Mandel wrote. What they're saying: "While J.D. Vance tries to talk tough on big tech, he depends on their money in every aspect of his life," Mandel campaign manager Scott Guthrie said in an emailed statement. "His campaign is funded by a board member of Facebook, and his personal income from his VC firm comes from the former CEO of Google and former CEO of AOL," Guthrie said. "Ohioans know that J.D. Vance is a Never-Trumper and a phony whose bills are literally paid by big tech." Last week, the Washington Examiner reported Thiel is putting another $10 million into a super PAC supporting Arizona Senate candidate Blake Masters, an executive at Thiel's venture capital firm and foundation. While locally branded, Saving Arizona PAC's focus so far appears to be national. Its digital ads are running nationwide and plugging Masters as the candidate who can tilt the Senate majority in Republicans' favor. The group's website domain was registered by James Blair, a Republican consultant and former top aide to Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis. Blair didn't respond to inquiries about his role with the group. In Missouri, Thiel has put a smaller sum — just $250,000 — into a super PAC backing the Senate bid by state attorney general Eric Schmitt. Thiel also backed Schmitt's predecessor as AG, Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.), during his 2018 Senate bid. Hawley is now arguably Washington's leading purveyor of the nationalist wing whose ranks Thiel hopes to swell next year.

I think I agree with you, but I also think when you are ultimately (as an end state) talking about upsetting the apple cart of folks (people who have inherently benefited and/or still benefit from inequality or whatever) by taking away advantages that have been forecasted and baked in (e.g. making it "harder" to be at status quo), you are firmly in the realm of emotion. Emotional responses by human beings have always been our greatest strength leading to amazing beauty and worst weakness leading to unthinkable evil. I'm not saying I agree with this line of thinking, I'm just trying to rationalize why it happens, to the best of my ability at least.

Nah brother; I said from a purely political lens and perspective, it’s an amazing play. In the same sentence that I said if liberals could have used a watered down, CRT framework to get adopted in public schools, that would have been a politically genius way of affecting hearts and minds and ultimately (eventually) change. I would need to go back and reread this entire thread but I think most here, except panchohorn, were like Jimmy and I in that we didn’t know the technical definition or implication of CRT and have been educated from this becoming a political football. That said I also recognize that terms and slogans and ideas, especially once’s reduced to acronyms, have a tendency to evolve and take on a meaning in public consciousness that is often wildly different from what it meant when it was originated, and I think CRT lives in that space, so if in a year or two this is still a political talking point, trying to reframe every conversation around what CRT is in a Phd program context is going to be even more pedantic than it already is becoming.

Fair enough; you are right that they've earned more credit and I hope to eat my words when they creatively blow my brains out of the water with an awesome explanation and re-introduce the conflict. And yea of course it's not a job title-- what I should have said to be more clear (and with your correction that they rightfully deserve some more benefit of the doubt): "the writers, who should be more focused on the external conflict of episode 1 which was very real and tense in season 1, seemed to have completely ignored it in ep 1 which is very confusing to viewers (or this viewer at least) and made for a weaker episode and season 2 premiere than big fans of the show expected. Let's hope they have something in mind in the next few ep's to remedy that!"

Yea, I am on the side of Simone here as is naija and I think his argument is sound but using the analogies he used was a mental error and he should just admit as much because it doesn't detract one bit from his point.

Here is the actual question she (Aly Raisman) responded to: Can you imagine what it would be like to compete in the absence of a crowd? There have been times when the crowd is really helpful and uplifting. Then there are also times when I’m doing a bar routine and someone on another event falls and you can hear the crowd gasp, or the crowd erupts for someone else, and it startles you. One of the hard things about beam finals, for example, was I felt like I could hear a pin drop. It’s so quiet in there, and sometimes you can hear the clicking of the cameras, you can hear someone talking in the audience, so that might be distracting. Gymnastics is not one of those sports where you want to be pumped up.

Yea he wasn't allowed in the owners box due to a dart game bet before he was a 3% owner. And we weren't allowed into the SEC because of a gentlemen's agreement lol. Just seems like a big miss on the part of the conflict writers, but maybe they will dump a lot of backstory and exposition in a sloppy way like a backwards looking montage or in a Luis from Ant man sped up story with Nate the Great narrating or something equally as lame. Also, I like and am on Team Roy Kent.

I read an interview with Ally Raisman before this happened and she was talking about how weird this Olympics probably is. In a normal year, it's awkward because you could be on the beam and then hear either the crowd gasping (if someone falls) or going wild (as someone lands something awesome) and it jolts you/scares you, but you are used to that. Gymnastics is such a focused/mental sport that being in an empty stadium and hearing the pen clicks of reporters and conversations and everything else has to be another wrinkle for gymnasts. That said, try to relate what happened to Simone to your own life. If you are a lawyer, have you ever had to present a case or try a case in front of the Supreme Court? If you are a businessman have you ever had to present to a BoD for 8 or 9 figures as the person who is solely responsible? Anything else similar? Because I have had a couple of times had to perform solo (professionally) at the highest level and the pressure and stress and anxiety can hit you out of nowhere. It sucks for her, and maybe there is an element of mental strength and dexterity or lack thereof, but she's earned the benefit of the doubt here IMO.

Yea he wasn't allowed in the owners box due to a dart game bet before he was a 3% owner. And we weren't allowed into the SEC because of a gentlemen's agreement lol.